HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-09-14 92-438 ORDERac
on
DatevSeptemberi14, 1992 Item No. 92-438
Item/Subject: Purchase of Manhole/Trench Box
Responsible Department: Purchasing/Public Services
Commentary:
Four bide were received for the manhole/trench box which
is an approved line item in the current Public Services
budget.
Arthur Stockus, Public Services Director, reviewed the bide
and recommends that the City reject the low bid from Bryant
Steel Works as nonresponsive. The reasons to reject the bid
were very poor workmanship and problems experienced with
similar Bryant equipment and Bryant's lack of experience in
manufacturing the equipment required, see attached memo.
The attached bid recommendation to purchase the manhole/
trench box from Jordan Equipment, the low responsive bidder
has been reviewed by the Finance Committee and referred to
the City Council with a recommendation not approve this
purchase.
Pa
Manager's Comments:—M T .ATbnu
b+4 9AAPl/`a an`ik.0 V.l'U t,�
aua�.0a19
a+d/a tPu nA s�,ii �
W p �d '+ "m ✓. nwV+VC'ty.M na rdr—*t —1
Associated informat on: Bid Aecovmenda ion, e d Tabulation
Memo from A. Stockus
Budget Approval
Finance Director
Legal Approval:
City Solicitor
Introduced For:
-0 Passage
/-7
First Reading
/-7
Referral
Page 1 of 1
Aexigned to Councuor Bragg, September 14, 1992
CITY OF BANGOR
(TUTEE.) Mrb2rr--ABOPrlging. Lhe. Yurohase of a. bknhol,alTcench.. 594, from Jordan_.
By the qty CoymeU of Br CUM of Deeper.
ORDEREDr
THAT the purchasing Agent in hereby authorized to purchase a
manhole/trench box from Jordan Equipment Company the lov responsive bidder
at $10:100.00.
92-438
IN CITY COUNCIL O R D E R
Sept tuber 14. 1992
P d Title.
CITY am AUNoxivivg the Pu.rchase of a ManMle/
.....................................
Trench Box from Jordan Equipment Company
..................................... ..
-attd
(Councilman '
92-438
CHU of Panjo Pe dabor
BID AWARD RECOMMENDATION
BID ITEM(S) Manhole/Trench Box
DEPARTMENT: Public Services
BUDGET REFERENCE:
Requisition No. 26887.
R Regular Appropriations Budget Amount 5 8.000.00
Enterprise Fund Item Total Amount of Bid 10,100.00
Award Recommendation: $
Other
Number of Bid Requests Sent: 8 Number of Bids Received: 4
Data Advertised August it 1992 Bid Opening Date August 19, 1992
BID AWARD:
Recommendation:— Low Bid SLOW Responsive Bid _ORaw
Comments:
Purchase the meahole/trench box from Jordan Equipment Company, the law
responsive bidder at $10,100.00. See Attached memorandum from Arthur
Stocker, Director Public Services.
Mdmu
APPROVALS
UJAM',gee
Ci , Cavneil Pinnna Comminee:
CITY OF O`NGOR
IRDIQUOTES
TITLE INRT01=/ ERM OR PAGE 1 OF
NIOOPENEO Ai 19. 1993
]sedan 09a1Pma4G
efftalaary Ptotlw-
Inn, 1aa.
9rym[ Sfeal Porka.
-
flan. Inc.
".
e
LLmin ' IT
EamncO. NI
1'Mrntliw. W
mnr
y /
m / ra
r / r
r /
/
gmW
7,
i UP
®k10.100.WL
WIT I ITM TOTAL
e1$15.fi90.00
UNIT I ITHIS TOTAL
R�i515.iV.W
OUT PRIM MEM
1.ea/Tni
Bm
$9.BW.00L
mfxauraa
Imprm
", SIR M
I
I
p I
I
�
I
I
MOM=
To.
DmNPelleyrino
b ore:
Adhursrociw
lhze
08/31/1992
Subject:
Manhole/Trench Box Sidi
I have received a copy of Poe amass of bids for the manhole 1 trench box bids
and would olfrr a few comments. The low bidder, Bryant Steel Works Inc, an $9,800 preeems
some problems for the Evarmaem based on the last trench box purchased from them. The
Second bidder, Jordan Equipment Co., at x10,100 has submit l a bid for a product that is pretty
much the standard throughout the industry.
The trench box to be provided by Bryan[ Steel Works, aceord'mg to Mr. Ken
McCue, is improved from the tcmch box provided to the City of Barger last year and repaired
twice by the supplier in this year. They have about 35 wits in the field at this time, well below
the 50 units in service that were mgwsted in the bid docummta. They also have changed, as a
remit ofrepated problems, the design of portions of the aevch box. There are far fewer than 50
of the redesigned vita now in service.
Due to the past problems with this m nufacmrema box and the fact dire we am also
asked to consider a redesigned box I would recommend that the bid be awarded to the second
bidder, Jordan Equipment Co. for the stated bid price. I do not feel thin We City should risk thew
®ployees on a new and relatively untried design. If we were in experience problems with the
new design it would mean substantial down time to have my problems corrected. At times we
®ot afford this time with out tying up mineral areas and equipment.
The fact that the bid is $2,100 over the budgeted amount preaems another problem
that I will be taking in the mamager with a copy of this letter. If you have my questions
concerning thin bid or would hike any additional information, please call.
W. E. Ba